LAWS(PAT)-2014-2-31

BRAJ MOHAN PRASAD SINHA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

Decided On February 25, 2014
Braj Mohan Prasad Sinha Appellant
V/S
STATE OF BIHAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the parties.

(2.) The solitary appellant has preferred this Appeal against his conviction for the offences under section 493 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/-, in default, three months rigorous imprisonment, for the offences under Section 494 of the Indian Penal Code sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and pay a fine of Rs.5000/-, in default, one month rigorous imprisonment, under Section 495 of the Indian Penal Code sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and a fine of Rs.3000/-, in default, 15 days rigorous imprisonment and under section 496 of the Indian Penal Code sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and pay a fine of Rs.2000/-, in default, 15 days rigorous imprisonment. He was also sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year under section 496 of the Indian Penal Code. However, the sentences are to run concurrently as awarded by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Patna on 26th February 1998 in Sessions Trial No. 202 of 1986 arising out of Complaint Case No. 107 (C) of 1985 by same judgment the co-accused were also convicted and sentenced giving rise to another Crl. Mis. Appeal No. 108 of 1998 but due to their death the said Appeal already stand abated vide order dated 12th August 2013. It was also directed by the trial Court that the amount of fine which is in total Rs.20,000/-, if realized, would be paid to the complainant.

(3.) After having heard learned counsel for the appellant at length for two to three consecutive dates and arriving at definite conclusion upholding the conviction but for hearing on the point of sentence the matter was adjourned for a month vide order dated 23rd September 2013 on the prayer of learned counsel for the appellant taking into consideration the mitigating circumstances in this case and also being inspired by decision of Apex Court in the case of Narottam Singh v. State of Punjab, 1978 CrLJ 1612 wherein in para 4, the Apex Court has held that :-